You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Re: Bin Laden dead
Great post. Don't agree with every single aspect of it, but it's a great take.
I personally think we need to stop the aid, pull out of virtually everywhere, lock the doors, become more self-sufficient, and go back to more of a early 1900's model of the U.S.
But that's just me.
Amen!!! 
Re: Bin Laden dead
If we try to ignore everything going on in the world, we're doomed for sure. At least this way we have a chance.
Says who? You? Our proven track record of flawless success?
The United States had made tremendous strides in preventing countries from acquiring nuclear weapons over the decades. So has Russia. I'm not talking about Bush's "spreading democracy" or Obama's "zones of freedom"(same thing, different wording).
Saddam would have had nukes had we not bombed the living shit out of Iraq in 1991. That war set his nuke program back decades(chemical weapons too). The 2003 invasion based on WMD was laughable. War would have been more legitimate had they just based it on the UN resolutions.
When the USSR collapsed, we played a huge role in getting former Soviet states to dismantle their nuclear weapons. Many countries(and terrorists) were licking their chops to have access to those weapons. The US and Russia prevented that from happening.
While South Africa made the decision themselves to dismantle their nuke arsenal, you can bet your ass the fact the US and Soviet Union(in the midst of the Cold War at the time) working together to monitor the situation played a role in their decision to end the program. The US and Soviets had been doing recon missions. One of the times the two worked together.
The US has also played a role in getting countries such as Algeria, Argentina, Mexico, Taiwan,etc. to abandon nuclear programs. Flagg or maybe DCK could elaborate further on this issue.
While the US may not be saints, we have done an amazing job(along with allies and foes) to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction.
Even a peaceful nation like Australia considered it but since they are under the US "nuclear umbrella", there was simply no point in moving forward with one.
A major achievement would be to get Israel to abandon its nuclear weapons but that is unlikely for obvious reasons.
Re: Bin Laden dead
Nobody is arguing that.
I just don't see why we have to continue doing it well into the future, when we're going butt up with a flower in it.
We can't afford to police the world forever and ever and ever and ever. We've got to eventually draw a line.
So you're telling me, being watch dogs of a continuing and constant recycling nuclear arms race is the reason to stay involved across the world?
Why can't we hand off those responsibilities to the allies of Europe & Asia? Lemme guess - we don't trust them. They don't have our resources.
Then what are we fuckin' doing with this waste of a time world circle jerk? If we aren't ever making any progress with empowering these other nations to patrol their own lands, we are going nowhere, it's about as effective as the war on drugs. We've got to eventually pass off these responsibilites.
The ONLY thing the U.S. should be worried about is Canada & Mexico, and seeing how Mexico has great food and great tequila, and Canada has plenty of trout fishing and the hottest pussy in the world.... we're doing just fine here in North America.
Re: Bin Laden dead
We won't be doing just fine in America when the nukes start flying. So yes, we have to do what we're doing. If we don't, there will be no world to worry about. It's not right, it shouldn't be that way, but it is. If there wasn't something like nukes out there, I would probably agree we should worry about ourselves. We don't have that option.
Re: Bin Laden dead
If we hadn't, someone else would have. Imagine a world where only the USSR and their allies had nukes post WWII...things would be a lot different than they are now. Balance is the only thing that makes this work as well (relatively speaking) as it has.
